[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 387 KB, 1028x1600, hack.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18888926 No.18888926 [Reply] [Original]

I am never reading Greeks again

>> No.18889027

>>18888926
If you are referring to the Republic, yeah it's quite a tiring dialogue to read. Second half is better tho and has some of the more interesting ideas of the dialogue & less nonsense like the utopia.

>> No.18889036

>>18889027
*less nonsense about the utopia as a slow buildup as it is in the first half and more interesting aspects of it

>> No.18889066

>>18888926
Filtered at the door

>> No.18889070

>fell for reading Greeks meme

>> No.18889076

Can you tell me why Justice shouldn't be the highest virtue that men should be striving for?

>> No.18889103

>>18889076
You should and everyone knows that, that is the point

>> No.18889105

>>18889027
>>18888926
>>18889036
>le Republic is about a political utopia
filtered

>> No.18889110

>>18889103
>everyone knows that,
But if they do know, then why is society filled with injustice? If they truly know how to be just, then why are all the rulers unjust and unwise?

>> No.18889144

>>18889105
What is it about then, may you tell?

>> No.18889160

>>18889144
it's about psychology and the path to the enlightenment and purification of the soul, so that it is ready to engage with philosophy.

>> No.18889166

>>18888926
This>>18889105

It's pretty obvious Op has barely read beyond the first book.

>> No.18889174

Just a heads up. All of the best books of plato and Aristotle are the one which people don’t tell you to read. The most recommended are the most boring by far. Probably still worth reading to give yourself a philosophical base though.

>> No.18889181

>>18889160
>the path to the enlightenment
This I recognized, but not the other two. I've mainly only read thru the entirety of the first half before I just started to skim the rest. Which books from the Republic would you suggest me to re-examine?

>> No.18889450

>>18889070
>fell for the reading meme

>> No.18889463

>>18889450
tl;dr

>> No.18889516

>>18889110
Not him but I like the moral intellectualism idea by Socrates. One who knows whats is right and bad will always do right.

>> No.18889630

>>18889144
It is a thought experiment, not a political manual. The though experiment itself is a plot device for a speech on the soul (the psychological, we would say now), that happens halfway into the Platonic corpus and is thematically linked to the Symposium, Phaedrus and Phaedo.

>> No.18889652

>>18888926
Why anon?

>> No.18889683

>>18889630
Thanks for the answer! I'll read those three other dialogues you mentioned.

>> No.18889700
File: 76 KB, 720x546, Suzanne.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18889700

>>18889683
Read all of them in order the Platonists intended them to be read. We are no longer sure of the Plato's plan itself, but here is a good arrangement building off the Neoplatonic reading list, with adjustments, by Bernard Suzanne. His lists seems reasonable to me; you may check his website for his own commentary.

I will also copypaste the list from Platonism General below for an alternative take:
[T]he following is the general order the Neoplatonists of Iamblichus, Syrianus, and Proclus' school [The Anonymous Prolegomena to Platonic Doctrine] recommended reading Plato's dialogues in, merged with recommendations from previous threads and John M. Cooper's order.

If you get stuck with something Plato is saying, check either Proclus or Ficino's commentaries. If, somehow, they don't resolve the aporia, go to the secondary sources list.
The dialogues with "⦾" are marked as essential parts of the "Platonic Canon" by the three aforementioned Neoplatonists: a decade crowned by the Timaeus and Parmenides. Curiously, the Republic and Laws were not part of the curriculum.
Those marked with "*" are of disputed authorship or is confirmed to be written by Plato's students but circulated under his name. Once you finish Timaeus and Parmenides (esp. the latter), you can comfortably start reading the Neoplatonists.

-- THE ORDER OF PLATO'S DIALOGUES --

⦾ Alcibiades I
>Protagoras
⦾ Gorgias
>Laws, Books I-V
>Euthyphro
>Apology
>Crito
⦾ Phaedo

⦾ Cratylus
⦾ Theaetetus
⦾ Sophist
⦾ Statesman
>Laws, Book X
>Meno
⦾ Phaedrus
>Ion
⦾ Symposium
⦾ Philebus
>Republic
⦾ Timaeus
>Critias
⦾ Parmenides
>Laws, Books VI-IX, XI-XXVI
>Epinomis*

>The Letters

>Alcibiades II*
>Hipparchus
>Rival Lovers*
>Theages*
>Charmides
>Laches
>Lysis
>Euthydemus
>Greater Hippias
>Lesser Hippias
>Menexenus
>Clitophon
>Minos*

>Definitions*
>On Justice*
>On Virtue*
>Demodocus
>Sisyphus*
>Halcyon*
>Eryxias*
>Axiochus*
>Epigrams*

>> No.18889722

>>18889700
Nah, not that one. The one that says SHIT SON or smth like that.

>> No.18889728

>>18889066
Kek

>> No.18889735

>>18889722
Wait, for a sec I though this is the chart thread. That's why I posted this lol. Nvm. But yeah ty for reminding of that.

>> No.18889763

>>18889735
You are new and already annoying as fuck. You will never be as cool as Frater. You will never be as cool as Sneed. You are almost as retarded as butterfly. Kys.

>> No.18889983

>>18889516
You know this isn't true though

>> No.18890070

>>18889983

Not OP but I agree with the evil=ignorance thing. Since you don't, Care to offer a counter example?

The usual one is 'What about the compulsive drinker? He knows that drinking is bad for him, but still his irrational part makes him do the bad instead of the good'.

But in my own case, I've noticed that in order to give in to the temptation, I have to perform a sophistic operation in which I convince myself, even only for a second, that giving in is actually good in some sense. E.g.:

- quitting cold turkey can't be good for health

- this has been a stressful day, I will have better chances if I quit starting from tomorrow

- I will give in voluntarily and then stop again, to prove that I've really mastered this vice and it hasn't any more power over me

>> No.18890082

>>18889516
read dostoevsky

>> No.18890102

>>18889110
Because nobody can agree on what justice is, and when it comes down to it, the strongest, most intelligent, most socially manipulative win and establish their own view of justice, whether or not it is just.

>> No.18890301

>>18889174
Cratylus is pretty boring. But which ones would you say?

>> No.18890322

>>18889700
Sorry, what does the ">" (i.e. the greentext) mean in this context?

>> No.18890333

>>18890070
Does your self-talk really decide on what you will do? You don't have a history of drinking binges that end horribly and you well know this time it will be all the same, yet go waste yourself regardless even remembering all the false excuses that never work out in the end?

What if I propose that the thymos, your irrational willing urges, overpower you, and THEN you make up a false explanation to your lack of control over the thymos precisely because your rational part is powerless? In the case of a chariot with the unruly steed of Passion diverting you from the path to Truth to the nearest lake of Booze, you just make up explanations on how you really wanted to ride to the lake of booze in the first place just this time for a moment, even if you know the drunken horse will do nothing all day afterwards except sleep and fart.

>> No.18890336

>>18890322
Doesn't seem to mean anything significant. I think it's just the rest which aren't considered essential in the list.

>> No.18890371

>>18889983
Maybe it can be applied to evil done because of hate,racism and idolation from the other and different. Smoking cigs and drinking booze is bad for you but is it an evil action?

>> No.18890380

>>18890371
Isolation*

>> No.18891702

>>18888926
No one even reads them anyways.

>> No.18891887
File: 254 KB, 750x1334, 1C8627DD-0FEB-4B46-9283-CD3ABD8753BD.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18891887

>>18889144
>>18889027
i mean, i dont take the pill that its totally NOT a utopian project, at least in part, but i do agree that it is first and formost a exercise in the thought experiment. given x y and z what can we suppose from it? and building it up and up until you have a utopian interlace of different ideas, both concreate and in terms of that which has been established.

IT IS DEFINITELY NOT a manual thats main intent is to build a utopia, but is a diagram of thoughts with given predicates which in its development forms a conceptual ciry among other things. it is part of a process rather than an ends in itself, but that doesnt mean it's not there, there are legitimate civic concepts with it. A way how to think, and some utopian concepts, as well as moral, aesthetic, civic, and logical products come with it.

so its not a strickly yes/no answer to its civic construction.

>> No.18891917

>>18888926
you're not missing anything